What do you prefer? I prefer a clean, healthy freshwater Lake as far North as 5th Avenue. Unfortunately in life, as my mother always said, we don’t always get what we want. Or prefer. I define a lake as a healthy body of freshwater that I can swim, boat, and recreate in…. The best available science indicates that even with significant upstream improvements to benefit water quality, and even with improvements in the lake basin itself to control stormwater runoff, we will still be plagued into perpetuity with fecal coliform, phosphorous/nitrogen, dissolved oxygen, water temperature, and other water quality issues.

This means there will never be swimming, extremely limited boating. Noxious weeds like Purple Loosestrife and Eurasian Milfoil. Algae blooms. Nutria to manage. Signs around the lake telling people not to go near or touch the water. In essence- an unattractive, unappealing, and unsafe freshwater stagnant pool. A dammed river. That’s not a lake. And certainly not what anyway envisioned for the Gateway to the Capitol Campus.

Given this information, an unhealthy and diseased dammed up river, or estuary restoration, it becomes more and more difficult to maintain my ‘preference’ for a lake.

What do you Support?

Given that it is impossible to maintain a healthy lake, I support-

Complete Cleanup of Contaminated Sediments in Budd Inlet- an over-dredge to accommodate future sediments, and engineering, planning, design & implementation to direct sediment to specific zones (traps) or send them beyond the marinas and berths.

A new entity with governance authority and a dedicated funding stream to manage sediments into perpetuity in Budd Inlet, with a charge to equitably collect resources and adaptively manage the navigable waters of the Inlet.

A pre-dredge of the Lake to prepare for estuary restoration that minimizes sediment flushing into the Inlet, and MAXIMIZES land for nearshore habitat (trees and shrubs, which minimizes mudflats).

Further study and research on the feasibility, O&M costs, and engineering for a reflecting pool in the North Basin- in essence, additional work on whether or not it is possible to do a ‘Dual Basin’ option. This was not fully explored by the CLAMP steering committee, and there is plenty of time to consider still.

An eventual, well planned and sequenced restoration of the Estuary, creating 200-260 acres of restored habitat, improving water quality across Budd Inlet, ands creating new and unique recreational opportunities for the region.

In the final analysis, what we prefer is not possible. To that end, we must make the best of what is possible…and that means carefully planning and implementing a restored estuary, considering a dual basin reflecting pool, and managing sediment effectively.

Some Key Issues –

Why is it better to manage sediment in Budd Inlet?

30% of the sediment no longer has to be managed, as it will be deposited well north of where it might need to be dredged.
Larger dredges can operate in the Inlet, saving time and mobilization.
Fish Windows are longer in the Inlet, as only Saltwater species must be contended with
Deep water disposal is less expensive and more convenient in the inlet.
Less dredges will be needed, less frequently.
All these things together mean it will cost less, take less time, and be more convenient to dredge future sediments in Budd Inlet than in a dammed riverway.

What is the relationship to LOTT and Sewer Rates?

Water quality is no longer an issue in West Bay, and is improved in East Bay. Overall circulation of the bay is improved with better flushing.

Improved water quality ensures LOTT maintains its discharge permit, alleviating the need to pump effluent up into the county for infiltration. Estimates of cost savings to LOTT ratepayers have not been formally addressed, but probably range in the millions of dollars in capital projects NOT needed by improving water quality.

Can a reflecting pool be made to work?

The dual basin option was never fully analyzed. The suggested engineering solution had challenges and problems…which might be mitigated, or addressed by proposing a different solution. No formal study of HOW it could be made to work has been done.

While there is a one time additional cost- It should be for the State Capitol Committee & Legislature to determine if the benefits- aesthetic and recreational- are worth that cost. The CLAMP steering committee was not in a position to weigh aesthetics effectively.

Further Economic Impact Analyses?

All economists tell us this is a very uncertain science, so the validity of data will always been hypothetical, criticized, and suspect.

Benefits would also have to be weighed- added recreational boating opportunities for hand launch boats, bird watching as an economic driver, less costs for sewer ratepayers … for every impact, there may be a matching or exceeding benefit to the economy.

The NET change, not just the costs would have to be considered, including emerging industries (Shellfish) and tourism potential.

Much of this will be required anyway as part of an EIS process, which would be a prerequisite phase before any action is taken.

The bigger picture…what else is at stake?

The West Bay Park & Trail – needs strong support from key stakeholders, and the habitat study beginning clearly indicates that habitat improvements all the way to the Deschutes Falls are best. May not be able to permit the Trail and fully developed park without restoration. Unclear at this time, but definitely a consideration.

Transportation Mobility – 5th avenue is dangerous for cyclists and pedestrians. Allowing a left turn to Deschutes Parkway from the lower roundabout improves circulation throughout West Olympia. These may be considered independent of this analysis, but they are supported by an option that replaces the bridge.

Dollars – Countless grants and funding opportunities, both state & federal, have been identified for restoration projects…none for Lake Maintenance. Practically speaking, we are on our own to pursue a lake. Costs would inhibit anything happening in the near or mid-term future.

Puget Sound – If we are serious about saving it, and improving conditions, it begins at the headwaters, the State Capitol, and we must provide leadership. Budd Inlet’s health dramatically improves under a restoration scenario, and by extension, Puget Sound’s Health.